About your Search

20110301
20110331
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
the internet? >> in the u.s., if i look at regulatory authority and i say, who is the one that is most up to speed, i think it has to be the federal communications commission. i certainly would not want to destroy the fcc and create something else. but what is the right role for the federal communications commission, and what authority should it be operating under? >> what about international regulation, the world wide net? >> we do not do a particularly great job of international regulation of anything, from trafficking in human -- all that sort of stuff. i do not think people are comfortable with, for example, the un regulating the internet. a lot of all internet hands are pretty happy with the non- governmental organizations that have done it in the past, but i think there are real questions about whether or not they fail. if you said, what international agency would do this, the i.t. you? i think you would -- the itu? i think you would hear a collective groan. i think the industry needs to be proactive, because i do not think it is a reasonable position for them to think they can push
providers to service providers to application providers and not just in the u.s., but internationally. so we work together, several schools at mit, with industry partners both internationally and domestically to look at various issues confronting the internet. and the idea is to try and think about technologically aware policy and business strategy and business strategy aware technology and sort of try and bridge that gap. >> host: what are you thinking about most these days? >> guest: well, with the internet there's a lot of things to think about. we personally, i spend a lot of time thinking about wireless issues, and i come out of a regulatory economics research background, and so i'm especially interested in all the sort of nontechnical side of, like, policy and business strategy, how that interacts with the internet. so, you know, how do we insure healthy investment climate for the internet, how would we design next generation internet architectures, how might we manage radio spectrum are some of the issues identify been thinking about -- i've been thinking about recently. >> host: when
from equipment providers to service providers to application providers, and not just in the u.s., but internationally. we work together, several schools at mit with industry partners, internationally and domestically on issues confronting the internet and ideas to technology aware business strategy and business strategy aware in technology and bridge that gap. >> what are you thinking about most these days? >> well, with the internet, there's a lot of things to think about. me, personally, i think about wireless issues, and i come out of a regulatory economics research background, so i'm especially interested in all of the sort of nontech any call side of policy and business strategy and how that interarguments with the -- interacts with the internet. how do we ensure healthy internet climate and how do we design architectures and the internet spectrums are what i think about recently. >> we'll get into that in just a min, but when you graduated from your first college, university of pennsylvania, you graduated in the era of flop y disks and dialup modems, what did you see in th
connected somehow over social media. what effect does that have on u.s. foreign policy oran space movements? political movements? >> the effect of political moments come in fact the foreign affairs article is partly just a description of what is happening in the social media landscape and it is partly -- it's partly an attempt to argue to the people thinking about these effects that we often overestimated the effect of access to information and underestimated the effect of the access to each other as a function of the digital network. so one of the things i see in the paper is access to information is less important than the access to conversation. the big effect you can see this playing out into nisha right now. it still affects the tools not to give people information they didn't already have come it's to help people who are who want to engage in the government in some way whether constructive work in the case of to nisha in insurgent ways it helps them communicate with one another and coordinate their activities so the effect of democracy is going to be strengthening in the public sphere
will get an update on the situation there, including the actions the u.s. has taken with allies and partners and the transition to a nato command. that is the president's speech of libya monday night at 7:30 eastern here on c-span and c- span radio. this week on "the communicators" different communications -- and perspectives on the communications deal between at&t and t-mobile. host: we will be getting several perspectives on the at&t, t- mobile deal. beginning with jeffrey silva who is a telecommunications policy analyst and robert bell aban antitrust attorney, we are also joined by david hatch of the "national journal." mr. silva what does at&t get for its $39 billion? guest: it gest a lot more spectrum -- it gets a lot more spectrum. it gets t-mobile customers. and it accomplishes the objective of removing one national competitor from the scene. host: mr. bell, what kind of antitrust issues are raised by this deal? guest: well, this is a direct horizontal merger between two direct competitors. this raises a core issue of whether the government should allow the marketplace
need to and to stop bad things, but i don't, you know, when i serve inside the u.s. senate -- served in the u.s. senate, i think i was viewed as a constructive conservative, and i count many, many friends on the democratic side of the aisle. so now that my ban on lobbying has been removed, i have found regardless of party the reception of me back on the hill has been warm and wonderful. and it doesn't matter whether it's republican or democrat. >> host: also joining us here on "the communicators" is jonathan make who is the assistant managing editor for "communications daily." >> host: thanks for having me. do you get concerned by what you mentioned, the procedural hurdles between the commission on one side which is, of course, controlled by democrats as is the white house and then the republican congress, and are we seeing in areas other than net neutrality which is the big concern right now among telecommunications issues, are we seeing that seep into broadcast issues, spectrum, retransmission consent? >> guest: well, undoubtedly, you know, sure, if i wanted to be a partisan, i'd l
to and to stop bad things. when i served in the u.s. senate, i think there was viewed as a constructive conservative. i have many friends on the democratic side of the aisle. now that my ban on lobbying has been removed, i have found that regardless of party the reception back on the hill has been warm and wonderful. it does not matter if it is republican or democrat. >> also joining us is jonathan the assistant managing editor of "communications daily." >> are you concerned about the procedural hurdles with the commission and then the republican congress? neutrality is the big concern right now. rbc in that go into broadcast issues -- are we seeing that going to broadcast issues? >> if i wanted to be a partisan, i would like everything my way. the truth is our history shows that some of our worst decisions are when you have one- party domination. those in the costing us a great deal of money and usually produce unintended consequences. divided government gives you an opportunity to fully that ideas. it does slow down the process. the founders of the american government with malice afor
:post cochairmen walden t would you like to see the fcc do when it comes to u.s. reform? >> guest: there are several principles. for sabar think you could find common ground that the funds have gotten too big. $8.8 billion growing. there are things and some that lifeline linkups that are a problem that is going to explode. i think as a sort of guiding principle, i represent a district of 75 miles. i've got a county where there is one person for every 9 miles of powerline. so usf matters in a district like mine a lot. what i want to make sure though is that it is properly constructed and reformed, so that the money that is there and is essential for service goes to those areas that without that support wouldn't survive so we can't be taking away from them. if we can get various reforms in place and we won't get into all those today, but we are working on those. then maybe there is an opportunity to work on some broadband as well. i want to make sure we have a broadband employment out into the last mile, the hardest to get to, the very rural areas. so i think there are lots of issue
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)